Some Myth Busting Facts About The 1960's.

philly rabbit said:
I'm glad you brought that up. JFK was part of the Democratic party's anti soviet - communist wing. JFK was also fiscally conservative as president. Both him and Bobby were also pro life.
Click to expand...

I share Kennedy's views on being liberal.

I am pro choice because I believe that it is not my right to make decisions for others. I believe it is between the woman and her doctor. My personal beliefs have no bearing on the rights of others.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/primary-resources/jfk-nyliberal/
 
philly rabbit said:
There you go with links again. So now I'm supposed to put up a counter link.

How could McGovern have possibly got the Dem nomination?
Click to expand...

The same way it has been done in the past, by declaring and then running a campaign, but this is all moot due to the fact that he didn't run in the 60's.
 
philly rabbit said:
There you go with links again. So now I'm supposed to put up a counter link.

How could McGovern have possibly got the Dem nomination?
Click to expand...

No, I just wanted you to see that abortion was not an issue in those times, do we do not really know JFK's position on abortion. His bring Catholic does not assure that he was against it. I know many Catholics who are pro choice.
 
Sardonic said:
The same way it has been done in the past, by declaring and then running a campaign, but this is all moot due to the fact that he didn't run in the 60's.
Click to expand...

McGovern was too radical to get the nomination by the Dems back then. Both the party and the country was too conservative to accept a fringe radical leftist.
 
Sardonic said:
The same way it has been done in the past, by declaring and then running a campaign, but this is all moot due to the fact that he didn't run in the 60's.
Click to expand...

Why didn't Eugene McCarthy get the Dem nomination? He was your people's candidate that the radicals tried to force the party to nominate with violence and rioting?

He was another fringe radical like McGovern was.

The answer is that America was still too conservative to accept a fringe radical.
 
philly rabbit said:
Why didn't Eugene McCarthy get the Dem nomination? He was your people's candidate that the radicals tried to force the party to nominate with violence and rioting?

He was another fringe radical like McGovern was.

The answer is that America was still too conservative to accept a fringe radical.
Click to expand...

Is there a point you are trying to make with this discussion that is suppose to apply to today or is it strictly an argument about the past?
 
philly rabbit said:
Why didn't Eugene McCarthy get the Dem nomination? He was your people's candidate that the radicals tried to force the party to nominate with violence and rioting?

He was another fringe radical like McGovern was.

The answer is that America was still too conservative to accept a fringe radical.
Click to expand...

Our country still liked war in the 60's, both McCarthy and McGovern were anti war. I wish they had won, my friends who died in Vietnam may still be alive!
 
exactly. For four years at Annapolis, we walked by the "For Those Who Went Before Us" display in the Rotunda and watched the faces and biographies of USNA graduates killed in Nam get more and more numerous every week. What a fucking waste of talent.
 
Sardonic said:
Our country still liked war in the 60's, both McCarthy and McGovern were anti war. I wish they had won, my friends who died in Vietnam may still be alive!
Click to expand...

McCarthy and McGovern were both as pink as you can get without actually being red.

And it's nice to see you countering your own statement about McGovern having the ability to run in the sixties as well as the seventies because you know damn well he couldn't and even get close to the Dem nomination if he tried.

McGovern's time in the seventies meant your time had arrived. You were no longer a blood thirsty mob trying to force your way onto the American political scene using violence and intimidation being led by so called "peaceniks." You were now politically civilized. You were now part of the establishment and you personally went on to be a good little scout mother and a chamber of commerce medal winner.

That still doesn't excuse your bloody violent legacy and your fraudulent claims that the sixties belonged to you and your ilk top to bottom. You have been exposed and your PC version of events have been explained in a manner that makes perfect sense and is historically accurate.
 
philly rabbit said:
McCarthy and McGovern were both as pink as you can get without actually being red.

And it's nice to see you countering your own statement about McGovern having the ability to run in the sixties as well as the seventies because you know damn well he couldn't and even get close to the Dem nomination if he tried.

McGovern's time in the seventies meant your time had arrived. You were no longer a blood thirsty mob trying to force your way onto the American political scene using violence and intimidation being led by so called "peaceniks." You were now politically civilized. You were now part of the establishment and you personally went on to be a good little scout mother and a chamber of commerce medal winner.

That still doesn't excuse your bloody violent legacy and your fraudulent claims that the sixties belonged to you and your ilk top to bottom. You have been exposed and your PC version of events have been explained in a manner that makes perfect sense and is historically accurate.
Click to expand...

Electing a Roman Catholic as President in the 60's was hugely progressive, liberal!

Sorry, you lose!
 
philly rabbit said:
McCarthy and McGovern were both as pink as you can get without actually being red.

And it's nice to see you countering your own statement about McGovern having the ability to run in the sixties as well as the seventies because you know damn well he couldn't and even get close to the Dem nomination if he tried.

McGovern's time in the seventies meant your time had arrived. You were no longer a blood thirsty mob trying to force your way onto the American political scene using violence and intimidation being led by so called "peaceniks." You were now politically civilized. You were now part of the establishment and you personally went on to be a good little scout mother and a chamber of commerce medal winner.

That still doesn't excuse your bloody violent legacy and your fraudulent claims that the sixties belonged to you and your ilk top to bottom. You have been exposed and your PC version of events have been explained in a manner that makes perfect sense and is historically accurate.
Click to expand...

Your legacy is that of the dodo bird!
 
Sardonic said:
Electing a Roman Catholic as President in the 60's was hugely progressive, liberal!

Sorry, you lose!
Click to expand...

I asked you repeatedly if far left McGovern could have gotten nominated in the sixties and you said yes then you backtracked and admitted that he couldn't.

Now your playing riddles because you've got nothing left except to claim victory without honor because you've been lying through your teeth all along.

I also explained that what is considered mainstream Democrat now was fringe radical left then.

Your code word "progressive" was the culmination of the breaking of skulls and bloodshed led by mob organizers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top